Lawsuit Filed Against Apple and Other Tech Companies Over Anti-Poaching Agreements

142738 saveri lchb

Law firm Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein today announced the filing of a class-action lawsuit against Apple and other tech companies over "no solicitation" agreements that prevented the companies from attempting to hire away each others' employees. The lawsuit, filed by former Lucasfilm engineer Siddharth Hariharan, contends that the anti-poaching agreements limited career opportunities for and instituted artificial salary caps on employees at the companies involved.

"My colleagues at Lucasfilm and I applied our skills, knowledge, and creativity to make the company an industry leader," stated Mr. Hariharan. "It's disappointing that, while we were working hard to make terrific products that resulted in enormous profits for Lucasfilm, senior executives of the company cut deals with other premiere high tech companies to eliminate competition and cap pay for skilled employees."

"Competition in the labor market results in better salaries, enhanced career opportunities for employees, and better products for consumers," stated [attorney Joseph] Saveri. "We estimate that because of reduced competition for their services, compensation for skilled employees at Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, Lucasfilm, and Pixar was reduced by 10 to 15 percent. These companies owe their tremendous successes to the sacrifices and hard work of their employees, and must take responsibility for their misconduct."

The lawsuit alleges that the "no solicitation" agreements first surfaced in 2005 between Lucasfilm and Pixar, with Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, and Intuit all joining the coalition that remained in place until at least 2009. The complaint seeks restitution for lost compensation and treble damages as punishment for the anti-competitive actions.

Specific claims of Apple's involvement in such anti-poaching agreements surfaced in August 2009 when a deal with Google was revealed. The U.S. Department of Justice finalized a settlement in September 2010 that barred Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, and Pixar from participating in such arrangements.

Popular Stories

iOS 26

iOS 26.1 Coming Soon: New Features for Your iPhone and Release Date

Monday October 27, 2025 7:55 am PDT by
The upcoming iOS 26.1 update includes a handful of new features and changes for iPhones, including a toggle for changing the appearance of the Liquid Glass design, "slide to stop" for alarms in the Clock app, and more. Below, we outline key details about iOS 26.1. Release Date Given that Apple has yet to seed an iOS 26.1 Release Candidate, which is typically the final beta version, the...
maxresdefault

Apple TV 4K Could Still Launch Before 2025 Ends: All the Rumored Features

Monday October 27, 2025 4:51 pm PDT by
Apple is designing an updated version of the Apple TV 4K, and rumors suggest that it could come out sometime in the next couple of months. We're not expecting a major overhaul with design changes, but even a simple chip upgrade will bring major improvements to Apple's set-top box. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. We've rounded up all the latest Apple TV rumors. ...
iOS 26

6 New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 26.1

Wednesday October 29, 2025 4:22 am PDT by
Apple is about to drop iOS 26.1, the first major point release since iOS 26 was rolled out in September, and there are at least six notable changes and improvements to look forward to. We've rounded them up below. Apple has already provided developers and public beta testers with the release candidate version of iOS 26.1, which means Apple will likely roll out the update to all compatible...
M6 MacBook Pro Feature 1

M6 MacBook Pro: Release Date, Pricing, and What to Expect

Monday October 27, 2025 9:15 am PDT by
Apple this month refreshed the 14-inch MacBook Pro base model with its new M5 chip, and higher-end 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro models with M5 Pro and M5 Max chips are expected to follow in early 2026. However, these machines will represent the final update to the current design, with Apple reportedly developing a completely new version of the MacBook Pro packed with next-generation hardware...
iOS 26

Apple Seeds iOS 26.1, iPadOS 26.1, and macOS Tahoe 26.1 Release Candidates

Tuesday October 28, 2025 1:07 pm PDT by
Apple today provided developers and public beta testers with the release candidate versions of upcoming iOS 26.1, iPadOS 26.1, macOS Tahoe 26.1, tvOS 26.1, watchOS 26.1, and visionOS 26.1 updates for testing purposes. The RCs betas come a week after Apple released the fourth betas. The new betas can be downloaded from the Settings app on a compatible device by going to General > Software...
iOS 26 Battery Glass Feature

iOS 26.1 Beta Liquid Glass Battery Drain Test: Tinted vs Clear Mode

Friday October 24, 2025 2:30 pm PDT by
In the fourth iOS 26.1 beta, Apple added a "Tinted" option that reduces the translucency of Liquid Glass for those who prefer a more opaque look. I saw some comments wondering whether the setting might preserve battery life, so I thought I'd do some testing. Test Settings I did four separate tests using the iPhone 17 Pro Max, and I kept the parameters as similar as possible. Here are the...
ios 26 digital id passport wallet

Apple Says U.S. Passport Feature on iPhone is Coming Soon

Monday October 27, 2025 7:41 am PDT by
You will "soon" be able to add a digital version of your U.S. passport to your iPhone, according to Jennifer Bailey, vice president of Apple Pay and Apple Wallet. Bailey reiterated that the feature is coming soon during her keynote at the Money20/20 USA conference in Las Vegas on Sunday. On its iOS 26 page, Apple says the delayed feature will be "coming later this year." Apple's...
macos tahoe

Here Are Apple's Release Notes for macOS Tahoe 26.1

Tuesday October 28, 2025 1:21 pm PDT by
Apple today provided developers and public beta testers with the release candidate version of macOS Tahoe 26.1, which means the update will likely see a public launch next week. The release candidate includes notes on what's in the update, so we have a full picture of the new features that Apple has included. macOS Tahoe 26.1 adds AutoMix support over AirPlay, improved FaceTime audio...
All Screen iPhone 2027 Feature 1

iPhone XX? 6 Features Rumored for Apple's 20th Anniversary iPhone

Monday October 27, 2025 4:01 pm PDT by
For the 10th anniversary iPhone that came out in 2017, Apple introduced the iPhone X with Face ID, notch, and minimized bezels, providing more display space than ever before. The 20th iPhone anniversary is approaching and Apple wants to take the iPhone X design even further. We're two years away from the 2027 iPhone, but it's tough for Apple to keep major changes under wraps. We've rounded...

Top Rated Comments

ktappe Avatar
189 months ago
Good

This certainly sounds as if it has merit. It's a blatant circumvention of the "free market" that many politicians, voters, and businessmen openly and frequently support. Now let's see how many of them actually believe in the "free market" by supporting this suit. Or will they oppose this suit and expose themselves as actually being "pro business" and anti worker. It's funny how many forget that "free market" should apply to all portions of the economy, including the workers.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
ciTiger Avatar
189 months ago
I find this outrageous... If you value an employee than make it worth for him to stay in your company... These companies make BILLIONS in revenue... Pay the people who make your revenues what they deserve!
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
milo Avatar
189 months ago
Just because they agree not to poach (they won't headhunt a specific person), they can advertise freely what ever salary for a position, who ever wants can apply, and resign from their current job.

The details aren't clear, but if they ignore job applications from anyone currently working in one of the other companies in the agreement, that would be a major disadvantage for those employees.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
CalBoy Avatar
189 months ago
Is there something in this, or is it just a case of a resentful ex-employee?

Just because they agree not to poach (they won't headhunt a specific person), they can advertise freely what ever salary for a position, who ever wants can apply, and resign from their current job.

Agreeing not to go after each other's top talent is a crime known as collusion, and more broadly it is the beginning stages of a trust. The competitive element of the market is completely destroyed if demand is being artificially suppressed.

There def is some merit to this argument but there could be a no compete claus. If that's the case then this lawsuit seems very valid. Probably wont amount to much however

Non-compete clauses are very tightly restricted in California. They only allow for trade secret protection and sensitive document protection. Thus, a former Pixar employee could not reveal to Lucasfilms what their next big project is, but he would be perfectly free to leave Pixar for Lucasfilms.

The DOJ already ruled this and the parties involved settled... At least these companies have that for their defense.
I agree that such agreement or practice goes against employees but how you can prove that you got affected and lost money or better employment???

well.. time will tell..:(

The Federal government settled a criminal prosecution. This is a civil lawsuit on the part of the injured employees.

I haven't taken a look at the full lawsuit yet, but I suspect that the plaintiffs are trying to make use of the Sherman Anti-Trust which allows for triple damages by default.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
mrzeigler Avatar
189 months ago
Knee-jerk anti-labor response.
It takes 2 sides to create a job offer, and if companies can't let workers know a job exists, then the worker is cut off at the knees.
Reminds me of the argument that unions aren't necessary because I have sufficient bargaining power as an individual against a billion dollar corporation.
Absurd.
Very good point.

As for the posters getting worked up about the dollars at stake here, the amount of money is not the issue here. Seriously. The issue is opportunity.

It's one thing to accept a job and sign a contract with a no-compete clause. In that case, the employee is going into the situation fully aware, and usually the salary reflects that exclusivity.

It's another situation entirely if you get a job with Company A and afterward discover that your employment with Company A puts you on a blacklist for companies B, C, D, E and F — at least some of which you'd prefer to work for — for reasons that have nothing to do with your competency.

These companies could fix this situation simply by negotiating with current employees to add no-compete clauses that detail specific companies or types of companies. In return for the stability that the employers desire, the companies should have to include extra pay or perks for the workers to give up their right to seek employment elsewhere within a certain period of time. They could then make such clauses standard for new hires.


Edit: This is said with the presumption that this situation isn't limited to just wine-and-dine, come-work-for-us recruiting but also extends to exclude prospective job candidates who currently work for specific companies but are seeking new employment.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)
smithrh Avatar
189 months ago
As someone from one of the purported companies that agreed to this, you can rest assured I am very much unhappy with this arrangement and it needs to be quashed - permanently.

Let's say I want to work for Apple - well, maybe they won't contact me, or they'll send my CV that I send to them to the shredder without reading it through. All because of where I work now.

Bluntly speaking - that's crap.
Score: 2 Votes (Like | Disagree)